Which is worse, the aspect of the U.S. system where people are denied care when they cannot pay or the U.K. system where they are denied care because their treatment would not lead to a significant increase in the quality of life?

Health Policy

In the United States, terminally ill patients can decline extraordinary medical treatment. Still, in all cases, the patient, or the spouse, is the one who makes that decision (either with prior instructions or by making their wishes known to the health care provider).

In the United Kingdom, the government can limit the availability of extraordinary medical treatment. Thus, though care is free (or nearly free) to the patient, it can be confined against their will.

The U.K. government contends that healthcare resources are scarce, and they would be wasted extending the life of a terminally ill patient by a few days or even years.

Which is worse, the aspect of the U.S. system where people are denied care when they cannot pay or the U.K. system where they are denied care because their treatment would not lead to a significant increase in the quality of life?

Think about your health insurance premiums and Medicare taxes. How can you apply the concept of cannot Moral Hazard to this issue?